Latest news with #non-Catholics
Yahoo
10-06-2025
- Politics
- Yahoo
Opinion: Another unanimous win for religious freedom at the Supreme Court
Is religious freedom a wedge issue? The unanimous agreement between all the justices in a decision just issued by the U.S. Supreme Court suggests the answer is no. The Court's example provides an important corrective to the framing of some commentators and advocacy groups. The facts of this case initially seem unreal — the state of Wisconsin determined that the Catholic Charities Bureau was not 'religious enough' to qualify for a tax exemption available to religious organizations in the state. Piling on, the Wisconsin Supreme Court agreed because Catholic Charities did not proselytize or exclude non-Catholics from its services. Thankfully, the U.S. Supreme Court has now corrected that decision and ruled unanimously that the state cannot prefer one religion over another on the grounds of the church's teachings. The Court's opinion was written by Justice Sonia Sotomayor. She points out, 'A law that differentiates between religions along theological lines is textbook denominational discrimination.' The state had denied the exemption to Catholic Charities simply because the group did not follow the practice of some other churches, which proselytize while providing social services and serve only fellow members. Since doing either of these things would violate the beliefs of the organization, it was treated differently from other religious organizations solely because of this belief. Justice Sotomayor's opinion summarizes the legal standard: 'When the government distinguishes among religions based on theological differences in their provision of services, it imposes a denominational preference that must satisfy the highest level of judicial scrutiny.' The Court rightly concludes that Wisconsin had no compelling reason that would justify this disparate treatment. Justice Clarence Thomas joined the Court's opinion and wrote separately to note another problem with the Wisconsin court's opinion. The Court treated Catholic Charities as separate from the local Catholic Diocese. This is contrary to the 'religious perspective' of the church, which is owed deference by the state. Ignoring the church's beliefs violated the First Amendment guarantee 'to religious institutions [of] broad autonomy to conduct their internal affairs and govern themselves.' Religion and claims for religious freedom are sometimes characterized as divisive issues. When a presidential commission on religious freedom was recently created, some commentators charged that this would undermine the separation of church and state. The Supreme Court's decision demonstrates that religious freedom issues need not be divisive. The clear constitutional protection of the right of people of faith to live and of religious organizations to operate consistent with their beliefs is right there in the text of the First Amendment. This is a threshold principle that no government can ignore without endangering the most basic liberties of its citizens. This is especially true given the fact that verbal expressions of personal faith have defined modern protections for freedom of speech, and gatherings of members of organized religion form the foundations for protections of freedom of association. State and federal lawmakers should ensure that their actions are consistent with this guarantee. Additionally, reporters, commentators, politicians and advocacy groups should take note that protecting religious freedom is typically a consensus issue for the U.S. Supreme Court, whose role is to ensure that the First Amendment guarantee is protected in legal disputes. In the 12 religious freedom cases decided since 2015, four have been unanimous and four more have garnered only one or two dissenting votes. There are, obviously, some cases where the justices don't reach consensus, but these cases should not cause us to lose sight of the strong support religious freedom claims typically receive. The Court's support for religious freedom is a bright spot in our current political climate. It demonstrates the wisdom of the Framers of the Bill of Rights in including specific religious exercise protections and vindicates one of the nation's highest aspirations: that people of faith should be free to act on their beliefs without interference or discrimination.
Yahoo
05-06-2025
- Business
- Yahoo
Supreme Court rules that Catholic groups were unlawfully barred from a religious tax exemption
WASHINGTON — The Supreme Court on Thursday ruled in favor of Catholic Church-affiliated charitable groups, saying they were wrongly denied religious exemptions from a Wisconsin tax that funds unemployment benefits. The justices ruled unanimously that the state's decision unlawfully discriminated against the groups on the basis of religion under the free exercise clause of the Constitution's First Amendment. The court rejected a Wisconsin Supreme Court decision that said that the groups operating under the Catholic Charities Bureau of the Diocese of Superior were not sufficiently religious in purpose. The state already provided exemptions for religious institutions. The First Amendment has long been interpreted to exempt religious entities from taxation. Writing for the court, liberal Justice Sonia Sotomayor noted the importance of the government remaining neutral when it comes to different religions. "When the government distinguishes among religions based on theological differences in their provision of services, it imposes a denominational preference that must satisfy the highest level of judicial scrutiny," Sotomayor said. But Wisconsin had "transgressed that principle," she added. The groups involved in the case — Headwaters, Barron County Developmental Services, Diversified Services and Black River Industries — primarily serve developmentally disabled people. Their programs are open to non-Catholics. The Wisconsin Labor and Industry Review Commission had concluded the charitable groups were not 'operated primarily for religious purposes' under state law. The Wisconsin Supreme Court in 2024 upheld the state commission's finding, saying the groups' activities were mostly secular in nature and that they do not 'attempt to imbue program participants with the Catholic faith nor supply any religious materials.' The Wisconsin unemployment compensation system was set up in 1932 to provide a safety net for people who lose their jobs. Similar programs in other states and the Federal Unemployment Tax Act also include religious exemptions. The Catholic groups had strong backing at the Supreme Court from other Christian sects and different religious faiths. This article was originally published on
Yahoo
05-06-2025
- Politics
- Yahoo
Supreme Court unanimously sides with Catholic charity group in tax exemption bid
The Supreme Court ruled Thursday that a Catholic charity group is entitled to tax relief it was denied on the basis that its operations were not primarily religious, a decision that could expand eligibility for religious tax exemptions. In a unanimous decision, the justices reversed the Wisconsin Supreme Court's determination that a chapter of Catholic Charities, a social services arm of Catholic diocese nationwide, does not qualify for a state unemployment tax because it doesn't sway those it serves to become Catholic. 'Much like a law exempting only those religious organizations that perform baptisms or worship on Sundays, an exemption that requires proselytization or exclusive service of co-religionists establishes a preference for certain religions based on the commands of their religious doctrine,' Justice Sonia Sotomayor wrote in the majority opinion. Catholic Charities Bureau is controlled by the Diocese of Superior, and insists its services reflect 'gospel values and the moral teaching of the church.' However, it serves and employs non-Catholics, completes work that could be administered by nonreligious groups and doesn't attempt to proselytize. Wisconsin's top court denied its request for religious exemption from the state's unemployment tax system after determining its activities were 'primarily charitable and secular,' instead of religious. Sotomayor noted that it's 'fundamental' to the constitutional order that 'neutrality between religion and religion' is maintained by the government. 'There may be hard calls to make in policing that rule, but this is not one,' she wrote. In a concurring opinion, Justices Clarence Thomas said he would have taken the court's ruling a step further to find that the lower court incorrectly deemed Catholic Charities as the primary 'organization' the group belongs to, as opposed to the broader Catholic Diocese of Superior. 'The First Amendment's guarantee of church autonomy gives religious institutions the right to define their internal governance structures without state interference,' Thomas wrote. 'Religious institutions may create different corporate entities to help manage their temporal affairs, but those entities do not define the broader religious institution's internal structure. 'Here, although Catholic Charities and its subentities are separately incorporated from the Diocese of Superior, they are, as a matter of church law, simply an arm of the Diocese,' he continued. Justice Ketanji Brown Jackson wrote a separate concurring opinion to further argue that the Federal Unemployment Tax Act (FUTA)'s religious exemption does not differentiate between charities based on their religious motivations, whom they serve or how. 'Rather, both the text and legislative history of FUTA's religious-purposes exemption confirm that Congress used the phrase 'operated primarily for religious purposes' to refer to the organization's function, not its inspiration,' she wrote. 'Put differently, (the law) turns on what an entity does, not how or why it does it.' The decision marks another victory for religious plaintiffs in disputes with states, a trend in recent years at the Supreme Court. The tax exemption case is one of three religion cases the justices agreed to hear this term, in addition to weighing whether parents of children in public school can opt out of LGBTQ book instruction and whether an online Catholic school can become a charter school in a nationwide first. Updated 10:51 a.m. EDT Copyright 2025 Nexstar Media, Inc. All rights reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten, or redistributed.
The Hill
05-06-2025
- Business
- The Hill
Supreme Court unanimously sides with Catholic charity group in tax exemption bid
The Supreme Court on Thursday ruled that a Catholic charity group is entitled to tax relief it was denied on the basis that its operations were not primarily religious, a decision that could expand eligibility for religious tax exemptions. In a unanimous decision, the justices reversed the Wisconsin Supreme Court's determination that a chapter of Catholic Charities, a social services arm of Catholic diocese nationwide, does not qualify for a state unemployment tax because it doesn't sway those it serves to become Catholic. 'Much like a law exempting only those religious organizations that perform baptisms or worship on Sundays, an exemption that requires proselytization or exclusive service of co-religionists establishes a preference for certain religions based on the commands of their religious doctrine,' Justice Sonia Sotomayor wrote in the majority opinion. Catholic Charities Bureau is controlled by the Diocese of Superior, and insists its services reflect 'gospel values and the moral teaching of the church.' However, it serves and employs non-Catholics, completes work that could be administered by nonreligious groups and doesn't attempt to proselytize. Wisconsin's top court denied its request for religious exemption from the state's unemployment tax system after determining its activities were 'primarily charitable and secular,' instead of religious. The decision marks another victory for religious plaintiffs in disputes with states, a trend in recent years at the Supreme Court. The tax exemption case is one of three religion cases the justices agreed to hear this term, in addition to weighing whether parents of children in public school can opt out of LGBTQ book instruction and whether an online Catholic school can become a charter school in a nationwide first.
NBC News
05-06-2025
- Business
- NBC News
Supreme Court rules that Catholic groups were unlawfully barred from a religious exemption
WASHINGTON — The Supreme Court on Thursday ruled in favor of Catholic Church-affiliated charitable groups, saying they were wrongly denied religious exemptions from a Wisconsin tax that funds unemployment benefits. The justices ruled unanimously that the state's decision unlawfully discriminated against the groups on the basis of religion under the free exercise clause of the Constitution's First Amendment. The court rejected a Wisconsin Supreme Court decision that said that the groups operating under the Catholic Charities Bureau of the Diocese of Superior were not sufficiently religious in purpose. The state already provided exemptions for religious institutions. The First Amendment has long been interpreted to exempt religious entities from taxation. Writing for the court, Justice Sonia Sotomayor wrote that the state court had "imposed a denominational preference by differentiating against religions on theological lines." The groups involved in the case — Headwaters, Barron County Developmental Services, Diversified Services and Black River Industries — primarily serve developmentally disabled people. Their programs are open to non-Catholics. The Wisconsin Labor and Industry Review Commission had concluded the charitable groups were not 'operated primarily for religious purposes' under state law. The Wisconsin Supreme Court in 2024 upheld the state commission's finding, saying the groups' activities were mostly secular in nature and that they do not 'attempt to imbue program participants with the Catholic faith nor supply any religious materials.' The Wisconsin unemployment compensation system was set up in 1932 to provide a safety net for people who lose their jobs. Similar programs in other states and the Federal Unemployment Tax Act also include religious exemptions. The Catholic groups had strong backing at the Supreme Court for other Christian sects and different religious faiths.
